Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 1273 - HC - Income TaxTP adjustment - selection of comparable M/s.Lubrizol - substantial question of law - whether ITAT was right in law in not holding that Lubrizol was not comparable or in the alternative, should have directed the Assessing Officer to provide adjustment in respect of the criteria due to which the appellant was differentiated from Lubrizol? - HELD THAT:- Assessee pointing out para 6.2 of the order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding Transportation Cost, submitted that since the Assessee had incurred additional cost for Transportation from Gujarat to Chennai, whereas the cost of transportation in the comparable case of M/s.Lubrizol was less and therefore, suitable adjustment should be made in this regard while determining the Arms Length Price in the case of the Assessee. The learned Tribunal has found that since the Assessee has not been able to establish the cost of transportation in the comparable case of M/s.Lubrizol lesser than the Assessee, the argument of the Asessee that suitable adjustment should be made was not upheld. We are of the opinion that the said finding of the learned Tribunal does not give rise to any substantial question of law requiring our consideration u/s 260A. A Division Bench of Karnataka High Court, where one of us (Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari) was a party in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. Softbrands India P. Ltd. [2018 (6) TMI 1327 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has held by a detailed judgment that in the case of determination of Arms Length Price, unless a perversity in the order passed by the learned Tribunal is established, no substantial question of law will arise requiring interference u/s 260A. - Appeals dismissed
|